Parents report that around 20% of infants cry a lot without apparent reason during the first four postnatal months. This crying can trigger parental depression, breastfeeding cessation, overfeeding, impaired parent–child relationships and child development, and infant abuse. The Surviving Crying (SC) cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT)-based materials were developed in earlier research to improve the coping, wellbeing and mental health of parents who judge their infant to be crying excessively.

This study set out to:

• develop a health visitor (HV) training module based on the SC materials, tailored to fit health visiting;

• assess whether HVs could deliver a SC-based service successfully;

• confirm whether parents gained similar benefits to those in the earlier study;

• prepare for a controlled trial of the SC-based service.

A training module was developed to enable HVs to deliver the SC materials, much of it provided online. Ten HVs took the training module (‘SC HVs’). They and the Institute of Health Visiting provided feedback to refine it. SC HV delivery of the CBT sessions to parents with excessively crying babies was assessed using a standardised test. Parental wellbeing was measured using validated questionnaires. Parents and SC HVs evaluated the effectiveness of the SC service using questionnaires or interviews.

The study produced the intended training module. Most SC HVs completed the training, and 50% delivered the SC-based service successfully. Both training and delivery were disrupted by the Covid-19 pandemic, illness and work pressures. Replicating earlier findings: most parents’ anxiety and depression scores declined substantially after receiving the SC service; improvements in parents’ confidence, frustration and sleep were found; and all parents and the SC HVs interviewed found the SC service useful and agreed it should be included in the National Health Service. A controlled trial of the resulting SC service is underway.

To develop evidence-based materials which provide information and support for parents who are concerned about their baby’s excessive crying. As well as meeting these parents’ needs, the aim was to develop a package of materials suitable for use by the UK National Health Service (NHS).

Parents report that around 20% of infants in Western countries cry excessively without an apparent reason during the first four months of age. Traditionally, research has focused on the crying and its causes. However, evidence is growing that how parents evaluate and respond to the crying needs to receive equal attention. This focus encompasses parental resources, vulnerabilities, well-being and mental health. At present, the UK NHS lacks a set of routine provisions to support parents who are concerned about their baby’s excessive crying. The rationales, methods and findings from a study developing materials for this purpose are reported.

Following a literature review, 20 parents whose babies previously cried excessively took part in focus groups or interviews. They provided reports on their experiences and the supports they would have liked when their baby was crying excessively. In addition, they identified their preferred delivery methods and devices for accessing information and rated four example support packages identified by the literature review.

During the period their baby cried excessively, most parents visited a health service professional and most considered these direct contacts to have provided helpful information and support. Websites were similarly popular. Telephones and tablets were the preferred means of accessing online information. Groups to meet other parents were considered an important additional resource by all the parents. Three package elements – a Surviving Crying website, a printed version of the website and a programme of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy-based support sessions delivered to parents by a qualified practitioner, were developed for further evaluation.

Child maltreatment is a significant public health issue in the United States. Yet, fewer than half of pediatricians discuss behavioral, developmental, or parenting issues with parents.

This paper describes the testing of bundles of tools and processes, part of a larger intervention, Practicing Safety, targeted at changing physician and staff behavior to identify families at risk for child maltreatment, provide anticipatory guidance, refer to community resources, and follow-up and track at-risk families. The intervention was implemented with 14 pediatric primary care practices throughout the United States; the study was completed in 2011.

A within-subjects repeated measures pre-post follow-up design was used to evaluate the intervention. Baseline and repeated measurements of pediatric practices’ processes were collected using qualitative and quantitative methods. In total, 14 core improvement teams from across the country tested three bundles of tools (maternal, infant, toddler) within a quality improvement framework over seven months.

Quantitative results showed statistically significant adoption of tools and processes and enhancement of practice behaviors and office environmental supports. The increase in tool use was immediate and was sustained for six months after implementation. Qualitative data provided insight as to how meaningful the intervention was to the core improvement teams, especially with more complicated behaviors (eg, engaging social workers or community agencies for referrals). Barriers included lack of community resources. Findings showed unanticipated outcomes such as helping practices to become medical homes.

Lessons learned included that practices appreciate and can adopt brief interventions that have meaningful and useful tools and process to enhance psychosocial care for children 0–3 and that do not place a burden on pediatric practice. An innovative, quality improvement strategy, intuitive to pediatricians, with a brief intervention may help prevent child maltreatment.

To examine two hypotheses about the longitudinal relationship between night-time parenting behaviours in the first few postnatal weeks and infant night-time sleep-waking at five weeks, three months and six months of age in normal London home environments.

Most western infants develop long night-time sleep periods by four months of age. However, around 20–30% of infants in many countries continue to sleep for short periods and cry out on waking in the night: the most common type of infant sleep behaviour problem. Preventive interventions may help families and improve services. There is evidence that ‘limit-setting’ parenting, which is common in western cultures, supports the development of settled infant night-time behaviour. However, this evidence has been challenged. The present study measures three components of limit-setting parenting (response delay, feeding interval, settling method), examines their stability, and assesses the predictive relationship between each of them and infant sleep-waking behaviours.

Longitudinal observations comparing a General-Community (n=101) group and subgroups with a Bed-Sharing (n=19) group on infra-red video, diary and questionnaire measures of parenting behaviours and infant feeding and sleep-waking at night.

Bed-Sharing parenting was highly infant-cued and stable. General-Community parenting involved more limit-setting, but was less stable, than Bed-Sharing parenting. One element of General-Community parenting – consistently introducing a short interval before feeding – was associated with the development of longer infant night-time feed intervals and longer day-time feeds at five weeks, compared with other General-Community and Bed-Sharing infants. Twice as many General-Community infants whose parents introduced these short intervals before feeding in the early weeks slept for long night-time periods at three months of age on both video and parent-report measures, compared with other General-Community and Bed-Sharing infants. The findings’ implications for our understanding of infant sleep-waking development, parenting programmes, and for practice and research, are discussed.

To provide descriptive figures for infant distress and associated parenting at night in normal London home environments during the first three months of age.

Most western infants develop long night-time sleep periods by four months of age. However, 30% of infants in many countries sleep for short periods and cry out on waking in the night: the most common type of infant sleep behaviour problem. Preventive interventions may help families and improve services. There is evidence that ‘limit-setting’ parenting, which is common in western cultures, supports the development of settled infant night-time behaviour. However, a recent review has challenged this and argued that this form of parenting risks distressing infants. This study describes limit-setting parenting as practiced in London, compares it with ‘infant-cued’ parenting and measures the associated infant distress.

Longitudinal infrared video, diary and questionnaire observations comparing a General-Community (n=101) group and subgroups with a Bed-Sharing (n=19) group on measures of infant and parenting behaviours at night.

General-Community parents took longer to detect and respond to infant waking and signalling, and to begin feeding, compared with the highly infant-cued care provided by Bed-Sharing parents. The average latency in General-Community parents’ responding to infant night-time waking was 3.5 min, during which infants fuss/cried for around 1 min. Compared with Bed-Sharing parenting, General-Community parenting was associated with increased infant distress of around 30 min/night at two weeks, reducing to 12 min/night by three months of age. However, differences in infant distress between General-Community subgroups adopting limit-setting versus infant-cued parenting were not large or statistically significant at any age. The figures provide descriptive evidence about limit-setting parenting which may counter some doubts about this form of parenting and help parents and professionals to make choices.